United States v. Diaz
864 F.2d 544 (1988)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
The crime of conspiracy to possess or distribute a controlled substance qualifies as a "drug trafficking crime" under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c). Under the Pinkerton doctrine, a defendant can be convicted for a co-conspirator's use of a firearm during and in relation to that conspiracy if the co-conspirator's act was a reasonably foreseeable consequence of their unlawful agreement.
Facts:
- Luis Rodriguez arranged a meeting between Gerardo Perez, who was seeking a cocaine supplier, and Reynaldo Diaz.
- Following the meeting, Reynaldo Diaz agreed to supply cocaine to Perez.
- On August 21 and September 3, 1987, Perez sold cocaine, which he testified was supplied by Diaz, to an undercover DEA agent.
- The second sale occurred a half-block from Diaz's house, and Perez and Rodriguez testified they dropped the money off at Diaz's house afterward.
- On September 9, 1987, Diaz, Perez, and Rodriguez met to sell one kilogram of cocaine to the undercover agent.
- Another conspirator, David Peirallo, arrived with the kilogram of cocaine and told Perez he had a gun that he intended to use if anyone tried to steal the drugs.
- During the transaction, Diaz stood by his car with the hood open, which the government alleged was a method to conceal the drug supplier from the buyer.
- Diaz contended he was merely at the scene because his car had broken down and he was unaware of any drug transaction.
Procedural Posture:
- A federal grand jury returned a six-count indictment charging Reynaldo Diaz and five co-defendants with various drug-related offenses in the United States District Court.
- Four of Diaz's co-defendants pleaded guilty.
- Diaz proceeded to a jury trial, where he was tried alongside co-defendant Jose Pineiro.
- The jury convicted Diaz of conspiracy to possess and distribute cocaine, possession and distribution of cocaine, and use of a firearm in relation to a drug trafficking crime.
- The district court sentenced Diaz to five years on each count.
- Diaz, as appellant, appealed his conviction to the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, with the United States as appellee.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does the crime of conspiracy to possess or distribute a controlled substance qualify as a 'drug trafficking crime' under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c), thereby allowing a firearm conviction to be based on a co-conspirator's use of a firearm in furtherance of the conspiracy?
Opinions:
Majority - Ripple, Circuit Judge
Yes, the crime of conspiracy to possess or distribute a controlled substance qualifies as a 'drug trafficking crime' under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c). The court held that the plain language of § 924, which defines a 'drug trafficking crime' as 'any felony violation of Federal law involving distribution,' unambiguously includes the crime of conspiracy to distribute. The court reasoned that Congress would not have intended to exempt conspiracy—an activity traditionally considered more dangerous due to concerted action—while punishing other drug-related offenses where a gun is carried. Furthermore, under the Pinkerton doctrine, Peirallo's possession of a firearm could be imputed to his co-conspirator, Diaz. The possession of the gun was a reasonably foreseeable act in furtherance of the conspiracy to sell a large quantity of cocaine, as the drug industry is inherently dangerous and violent.
Analysis:
This decision solidifies the application of the Pinkerton co-conspirator liability doctrine to the federal firearm statute, 18 U.S.C. § 924(c). It confirms that participation in a drug conspiracy exposes a defendant to liability for foreseeable crimes committed by other members, even without direct involvement or knowledge of that specific crime. The ruling broadens the scope of culpability for firearm offenses in the context of group criminal activity, emphasizing that the inherent dangers of drug trafficking make the presence of weapons a 'reasonably foreseeable' consequence for all participants.
Unlock the full brief for United States v. Diaz